| XML
About
Home
RSS
OPML
XML-RPC
SOAP
|
|
 |
|
creativeCommons RSS Module
Previous topic
|
Next topic
|
|
 creativeCommons RSS Module
started 12/16/2002; 4:40:42 AM - last post 12/17/2002; 11:46:05 AM
|
|
Dave Winer - creativeCommons RSS Module 
12/16/2002; 4:40:42 AM (reads: 715100, responses: 7)
|
|
A RSS module that adds an element at the <channel> or <item> level that specifies which Creative Commons license applies.
Status 
Deployable.
Change Notes
04/13/03 by DW -- Supported by Manila.
12/18/02 by DW -- Removed caveat, changed the status to Deployable.
12/17/02 by DW -- Notes.
12/16/02 by DW -- Created.
Description
One element is defined.
license -- if present as a sub-element of <channel>, indicates that the content of the RSS file is available under a license, indicated by a URL, which is the value of the license element. A list of some licenses that may be used in this context is on the Creative Commons website on this page, however the <license> element may point to licenses not authored by Creative Commons.
You may also use the <license> element as a sub-element of <item>. When used this way it applies only to the content of that item. If an item has a license, and the channel does too, the license on the item applies, i.e. the inner license overrides the outer one.
Multiple <license> elements are allowed, in either context, indicating that the content is available under multiple licenses.
Namespace declaration
xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
Example
Here's a file that illustrates the use of the <license> element.
License
 .
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
|
|
Breyten - Re: RFC: creativeCommons RSS Module
12/16/2002; 6:19:10 AM (reads: 19998, responses: 1)
|
|
|
Hey Dave,
why not just use the rdf:resource attribute? With this proposal it's just getting needlessly difficult to implement CC in applications that need to work with RSS1.0 and RSS2.0 .
|
|
Dave Winer - Re: RFC: creativeCommons RSS Module
12/16/2002; 6:33:52 AM (reads: 22974, responses: 0)
|
|
|
Not in RSS 2.0. It doesn't make any sense. It's not RDF.
|
|
Matthew Gifford - Re: RFC: creativeCommons RSS Module
12/17/2002; 12:41:17 AM (reads: 21195, responses: 2)
|
|
|
Good morning, Dave. I tried to validate my RSS 2.0 file at http://feeds.archive.org/validator/ with the cc namespace in it. It fails because:
The prefix "cc" generally uses the namespace "http://web.resource.org/cc/"
|
|
Dave Winer - Re: RFC: creativeCommons RSS Module
12/17/2002; 2:30:06 AM (reads: 23028, responses: 1)
|
|
|
I sent a note to Sam and Mark, I think the validator should not have an opinion about this, it's being over-zealous.
|
|
Sam Ruby - Re: RFC: creativeCommons RSS Module
12/17/2002; 2:42:47 AM (reads: 27045, responses: 0)
|
|
|
Actually, Dave and I talked about this on the phone the day he called me to congratulate me on the debut of the validator.
There are a lot of simple text based parsers of RSS who are more than likely to simply look for "blogChannel:blink" without actually realizing that blogChannel may actually be defined in this document as a completely different namespace than http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule.
All in all, I do think that the validator should have an opinion on this. This being said, it shouldn't be marked as fatal error, but as a warning of something that one should be concerned about. Much of the infrastructure for this type of support is in place in the existing valdator. Mark and I will likely complete hooking this up after the holidays.
|
|
Ravi Nanavati - Re: RFC: creativeCommons RSS Module
12/17/2002; 11:07:26 AM (reads: 24095, responses: 1)
|
|
|
I think it might be implied, but I'd suggest stating that multiple <license> elements are allowed at the item and channel levels. This should indicate that the content is available under multiple licenses. Any <license> elements at the item level override all licenses at the channel level, of course.
|
|
Dave Winer - Re: RFC: creativeCommons RSS Module
12/17/2002; 11:46:05 AM (reads: 24155, responses: 0)
|
|
|
Good point. I made the change.
|
|
|
|
